13:48:59 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
13:49:03 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-irc
13:49:03 <PhilDay> meeting:  WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:49:03 <PhilDay> rrsagent, make minutes
13:49:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
13:49:06 <Zakim> agenda cleared
13:49:06 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:49:07 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:49:26 <PhilDay> chair:  PhilDay
13:49:36 <PhilDay> RRSagent, make minutes
13:49:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
13:50:01 <PhilDay> zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
13:50:01 <Zakim> ok, PhilDay
13:50:08 <PhilDay> agenda+ Announcements
13:50:08 <PhilDay> agenda+ SC 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast 'Problematic for Closed' - resolve from last week - leave current text
13:50:08 <PhilDay> agenda+ SC 1.4.11 - Non-text Contrast adding new note from Mitch's proposal
13:50:08 <PhilDay> agenda+ Review plan for document - assign volunteers to review different parts
13:50:16 <PhilDay> present+
13:50:16 <PhilDay> regrets: Laura Miller, Loïc Martínez-Normand
13:50:24 <PhilDay> RRSagent, make minutes
13:50:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
13:55:56 <PhilDay> scribe+ PhilDay
13:56:38 <PhilDay> agenda?
14:02:00 <PhilDay> NAMES
14:02:29 <PhilDay> NAMES wcag2ict
14:02:57 <PhilDay> agenda?
14:03:05 <PhilDay> RRSagent, make minutes
14:03:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
14:07:01 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:07:09 <bbailey> present+
14:07:14 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:07:14 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from PhilDay]
14:07:23 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:07:23 <Zakim> agendum 1 was just opened, PhilDay
14:07:30 <PhilDay> zakim, close item 1
14:07:30 <Zakim> agendum 1, Announcements, closed
14:07:31 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:07:31 <Zakim> 2. SC 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast 'Problematic for Closed' - resolve from last week - leave current text [from PhilDay]
14:07:36 <PhilDay> zakim, take up item 2
14:07:36 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- SC 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast 'Problematic for Closed' - resolve from last week - leave current text -- taken up [from PhilDay]
14:08:06 <PhilDay> Link to issue:  https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/946
14:08:19 <PhilDay> Proposal 0 - current content for SC problematic for closed
14:08:19 <PhilDay> 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast — There are cases where applying this success criterion to non-web software on ICT with closed functionality is problematic:
14:08:19 <PhilDay> When the contrast of the content is determined by the hardware and not modifiable by the software author, it may not be possible to meet this success criterion.
14:08:19 <PhilDay> Note 4 Contrast requirements for hardware are out of scope for WCAG2ICT (and this success criterion).
14:08:21 <PhilDay> When the color contrast ratio cannot be programmatically measured due to system limitations (e.g. lockdown), precise quantifiable testing of color contrast cannot be performed by a third party. In such cases, the software author would need to confirm that the color combinations used meet the contrast requirement.
14:08:21 <PhilDay> Note 5 Photographs are not sufficient for testing that content meets this success criterion. This is because the quality of the lighting, camera, and physical aspects of the hardware display can dramatically affect the ability to capture the content for testing purposes.
14:09:52 <PhilDay> Recollection was that we felt that the original text better served the purpose of SC closed.
14:10:28 <PhilDay> DRAFT RESOLUTION (FROM LAST WEEK): For SC problematic for closed for 1.4.11 Non-text contrast, incorporate proposal 0 (make no changes) into the editor’s draft, as is
14:12:05 <loicmn> loicmn has joined #wcag2ict
14:12:32 <loicmn> present+
14:13:19 <PhilDay> Gregg: Still think that SC 1.4.11 shouldn't be in SC problematic for closed any more - as whether a system is closed has no bearing on this
14:16:40 <PhilDay> loicmn: Suggest the notes about hardware restrictions could be moved to 1.4.11 as general notes.
14:18:01 <PhilDay> DRAFT RESOLUTION: For SC problematic for closed for 1.4.11 Non-text contrast, remove all notes in SC problematic for closed, and move to SC 1.4.11 as general notes for non-web software
14:18:09 <loicmn> +1
14:18:12 <bbailey> +1
14:18:16 <PhilDay> +1
14:19:20 <loicmn> q+ to say that the same for 1.4.3
14:19:42 <PhilDay> Gregg: Do the same for 1.4.3 (the other contrast requirement)
14:19:46 <PhilDay> loicmn: +1 to Gregg
14:20:09 <PhilDay> ... All contrast SC. 1.4.3, 1.4.6, 1.4.11 - should have same notes applied
14:20:21 <PhilDay> RESOLUTION: For SC problematic for closed for 1.4.11 Non-text contrast, remove all notes in SC problematic for closed, and move to SC 1.4.11 as general notes for non-web software
14:20:48 <PhilDay> ACTION: PhilDay to ensure new notes are applied to 1.4.3, 1.4.6 and 1.4.11
14:20:55 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:20:55 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, PhilDay
14:20:57 <PhilDay> ack loicmn
14:20:57 <Zakim> loicmn, you wanted to say that the same for 1.4.3
14:21:01 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:21:01 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- SC 1.4.11 - Non-text Contrast adding new note from Mitch's proposal -- taken up [from PhilDay]
14:21:20 <PhilDay> Link to current content for SC 1.4.11 https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#applying-sc-1-4-11-non-text-contrast-to-non-web-documents-and-non-web-software
14:21:39 <PhilDay> Current notes from editor’s draft
14:21:39 <PhilDay> Applying SC 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast to non-web documents and non-web software
14:21:39 <PhilDay> This applies directly as written and as described in Intent from Understanding Success Criterion 1.4.11, replacing "user agent" with "user agent or other platform software".
14:21:39 <PhilDay> With this substitution, it would read:
14:21:41 <PhilDay> 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast: The visual presentation of the following have a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 against adjacent color(s):
14:21:41 <PhilDay> User Interface Components
14:21:41 <PhilDay> Visual information required to identify user interface components and states, except for inactive components or where the appearance of the component is determined by the [user agent or other platform software] and not modified by the author;
14:21:42 <PhilDay> Graphical Objects
14:21:42 <PhilDay> Parts of graphics required to understand the content, except when a particular presentation of graphics is essential to the information being conveyed.
14:21:42 <PhilDay> NOTE 1 (ADDED)
14:21:43 <PhilDay> An example of appearance modification by the author is content that sets the visual style of a control, such as a color or border, to differ from the default style for the user agent or platform.
14:21:43 <PhilDay> NOTE 2 (ADDED) (FOR NON-WEB SOFTWARE)
14:21:43 <PhilDay> See also the Comments on Closed Functionality.
14:21:58 <PhilDay> Proposal 1 - Mitch's edit – now as new notes for SC 1.4.11
14:21:58 <PhilDay> NOTE 2 (ADDED) (FOR NON-WEB SOFTWARE)
14:21:58 <PhilDay> There are cases where applying this success criterion to non-web software on ICT is problematic:
14:21:58 <PhilDay> When software authors can modify the appearance of content, but only within a limited contrast range determined by hardware, it may not be possible to meet this success criterion.
14:22:00 <PhilDay> NOTE 3 (ADDED) (FOR NON-WEB SOFTWARE)
14:22:00 <PhilDay> See also the Comments on Closed Functionality.
14:22:27 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #wcag2ict
14:22:34 <loicmn> q+
14:22:38 <PhilDay> ack loicmn
14:23:10 <PhilDay> loicmn: No longer need the reference to comments on closed functionality
14:23:25 <PhilDay> NOTE 3 can be removed - no need for ref to closed functionality
14:23:51 <PhilDay> Proposal 1 - Mitch's edit – now as new notes for SC 1.4.11
14:23:51 <PhilDay> NOTE 2 (ADDED) (FOR NON-WEB SOFTWARE)
14:23:51 <PhilDay> There are cases where applying this success criterion to non-web software on ICT is problematic:
14:23:51 <PhilDay> When software authors can modify the appearance of content, but only within a limited contrast range determined by hardware, it may not be possible to meet this success criterion.
14:24:08 <bbailey> +1
14:25:32 <PhilDay> Proposal 1 - Mitch's edit – now as new notes for SC 1.4.11
14:25:32 <PhilDay> NOTE 2 (ADDED) (FOR NON-WEB SOFTWARE)
14:25:32 <PhilDay> There are cases where applying this success criterion to non-web software on ICT is problematic:
14:25:32 <PhilDay> When software authors can modify the appearance of content, but only within a limited contrast range determined by hardware, it may be difficult to meet this success criterion.
14:27:02 <PhilDay> DRAFT RESOLUTION: For 1.4.11 Non-text contrast, add new note, remove note on closed functionality, as shown in minutes above
14:27:13 <loicmn> +1
14:27:19 <bbailey> +1
14:27:22 <PhilDay> +1
14:27:23 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #wcag2ict
14:27:45 <GreggVan> +1
14:28:00 <PhilDay> RESOLUTION: For 1.4.11 Non-text contrast, add new note, remove note on closed functionality, as shown in minutes above
14:28:34 <bbailey> In 508 space, might say “not technically feasible” or “fundamental alteration”
14:28:36 <GreggVan> present+
14:28:38 <PhilDay> NOTE 2 (ADDED) (FOR NON-WEB SOFTWARE)
14:28:38 <PhilDay> There are cases where applying this success criterion to non-web software on ICT is problematic:
14:28:38 <PhilDay> When software authors can modify the appearance of content, but only within a limited contrast range or color pallet determined by hardware, it may be difficult to meet this success criterion.
14:30:36 <PhilDay> NOTE 2 (ADDED) (FOR NON-WEB SOFTWARE)
14:30:36 <PhilDay> There are cases where applying this success criterion to non-web software on ICT may be difficult:
14:30:36 <PhilDay> When software authors can modify the appearance of content, but only within a limited contrast range determined by hardware, it may be more difficult to meet this success criterion.
14:30:42 <loicmn> +1
14:32:36 <PhilDay> Final edit: It may be more difficult to meet this success criterion when software authors can modify the appearance of content, but only within a limited contrast range or color palette determined by hardware or platform.
14:32:38 <bbailey> It may be more difficult to meet this success criterion when software authors can modify the appearance of content only within a limited contrast range determined by hardware or platform.
14:32:56 <loicmn> +1 to Bruce's
14:33:01 <PhilDay> +1 to Bruce's as well
14:33:29 <bbailey> It may be more difficult to meet this success criterion when software authors can modify the appearance of content within a limited contrast range determined by hardware or platform.
14:33:54 <GreggVan> +1
14:34:03 <PhilDay> It may be more difficult to meet this success criterion when software authors can only modify the appearance of content within a limited contrast range determined by hardware or platform.
14:34:12 <loicmn> +1
14:34:16 <GreggVan> +1
14:34:16 <bbailey> +1
14:34:17 <PhilDay> zakim, next item
14:34:17 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Review plan for document - assign volunteers to review different parts -- taken up [from PhilDay]
14:34:51 <GreggVan> +1 to that   no more edits !!!!!
14:34:53 <PhilDay> Diff between December 2025 version and current editor’s draft: https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2F2025%2FNOTE-wcag2ict-22-20251211%2F&doc2=https%3A%2F%2Fw3c.github.io%2Fwcag2ict%2F
14:35:01 <PhilDay> Clean version of December 2025 version: https://www.w3.org/TR/2025/NOTE-wcag2ict-22-20251211/
14:35:10 <PhilDay> Clean version of editor’s draft: https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/
14:35:55 <bbailey> q+
14:36:03 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Just read the latest editor's draft without looking at changes may help pick up consistency issues
14:36:10 <PhilDay> ack bbailey
14:36:35 <PhilDay> 3 main sections to review
14:36:37 <PhilDay> Introduction & following with particular focus on
14:36:37 <PhilDay> Guidance in this document: https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#guidance-in-this-document
14:36:37 <PhilDay> Interpretation of web terminology in a non-web context: https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#interpretation-of-web-terminology-in-a-non-web-context
14:36:51 <PhilDay> 2nd section: Key terms: https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#key-terms
14:37:30 <PhilDay> Comments on level AAA success criteria
14:37:30 <PhilDay> https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#comments-on-level-aaa-success-criteria
14:37:30 <PhilDay> Success criteria problematic for closed functionality / A2 Level AAA criteria: https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/#level-aaa-criteria
14:37:30 <PhilDay> Note that SC problematic for closed functionality will be restructured when Daniel has time – migrating from a very long list to each SC having a separate heading. See issues  https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/869 and https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/938
14:37:48 <PhilDay> bbailey: Suggest we hold off a final read until Daniel has made changes to the SC problematic section
14:37:59 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Agree with bbailey: we should wait until we think we are done
14:38:55 <PhilDay> loicmn: Think we could review the earlier sections without changes from Daniel
14:40:48 <PhilDay> If people have time please review the introductory sections as listed above.
14:40:48 <PhilDay> We will review comments on Level AAA SC, and SC problematic sections after Daniel has restructured.
14:41:55 <PhilDay> ACTION: PhilDay to check with Daniel on timeline for changes to SC problematic
14:42:30 <PhilDay> ACTION: PhilDay to then send email to TF updating when the next meeting will be based on Daniel's timeline
14:42:41 <PhilDay> RRSAgent, make minutes
14:42:42 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
14:43:03 <PhilDay> s/NAMES/
14:43:15 <PhilDay> s/NAMES wcag2ict/
14:43:19 <PhilDay> RRSAgent, make minutes
14:43:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
14:43:45 <PhilDay> s/NAMES/
14:43:48 <PhilDay> RRSAgent, make minutes
14:43:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
14:44:08 <PhilDay> zakim, end meeting
14:44:08 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been PhilDay, bbailey, loicmn, GreggVan
14:44:10 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
14:44:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-minutes.html Zakim
14:44:17 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, PhilDay; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
14:44:19 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict
14:44:20 <PhilDay> rrsagent, bye
14:44:20 <RRSAgent> I see 3 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-actions.rdf :
14:44:20 <RRSAgent> ACTION: PhilDay to ensure new notes are applied to 1.4.3, 1.4.6 and 1.4.11 [1]
14:44:20 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-irc#T14-20-48
14:44:20 <RRSAgent> ACTION: PhilDay to check with Daniel on timeline for changes to SC problematic [2]
14:44:20 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-irc#T14-41-55
14:44:20 <RRSAgent> ACTION: PhilDay to then send email to TF updating when the next meeting will be based on Daniel's timeline [3]
14:44:20 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2026/07/09-wcag2ict-irc#T14-42-30